WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that former President Donald Trump is immune from some of the federal charges brought against him for allegedly trying to overturn the 2020 election.
The court’s 6-3 ruling on July 1 says Trump has absolute immunity for actions within his core constitutional powers — and former presidents are also entitled to at least a presumption of immunity for their official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts, according to the ruling. The majority opinion, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, says Trump is absolutely immune from prosecution for his discussion with Justice Department officials and remanded for further proceedings in the district court to determine which of Trump’s other acts might be immune.
West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey hailed the ruling.
“By holding that President Trump is absolutely immune from prosecution in some areas, the nation’s highest court has made the right decision,” Morrisey said. “Those following this sham prosecution know this is political to the core, maneuvered by the Biden administration to eliminate from the political arena a man who could possibly be the next President of the United States.
“It would have been a travesty if this case ended up favoring the government—prosecutions like this would become routine, disabling the ability of presidents to do their job as commander in chief.”
In allowing Trump to claim immunity from criminal prosecution for some of the actions he took in the waning days of his presidency, today’s ruling further delays special counsel Jack Smith's prosecution.
In the majority opinion, Roberts did reject Trump's broad immunity claims, saying Trump only has immunity for his "official" acts as president. But the justices did not outline what is and isn’t an official act, leaving that decision to the lower court.
The U.S. Supreme Court's liberal justices wrote scathing dissents. In hers, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said the majority ruling "breaks new and dangerous ground.”
Today’s ruling rejects a February decision from a federal appeals court that found Trump enjoyed no immunity for alleged crimes he committed during his presidency to reverse the 2020 election results.
In a concurring opinion, Justice Amy Coney Barrett said she agreed with the majority that Trump has some immunity from prosecution. But she also said the decision shouldn't get in the way of his standing trial.
"A President facing prosecution may challenge the constitutionality of a criminal statute as applied to official acts alleged in the indictment,” Coney Barrett wrote said, adding that the court rejected Trump's broad immunity claims. “If that challenge fails, however, he must stand trial."
Comey Barrett also agreed with the dissent's opinion that immune conduct should still be allowed to be used as evidence in his trial.
"I appreciate the (majority's) concern that allowing into evidence official acts for which the President cannot be held criminally liable may prejudice the jury," but, "the Constitution does not require blinding juries to the circumstances surrounding conduct for which Presidents can be held liable."